Constitutional History of England, Henry VII to George II. Volume 3 of 3
i. 158, they complain of the oath of supremacy, which, they say, had
not been much imposed under the queen, but was now for the first time enforced in the remote parts of the country; so that the most sufficient gentry were excluded from magistracy, and meaner persons, if conformable, put instead. It is said on the other side, that the laws against recusants were very little enforced, from the difficulty of getting juries to present them. _Id._ 359. Carte's _Ormond_, 33. But this at least shows that there was some disposition to molest the catholics on the part of the government; and it is admitted that they were excluded from offices, and even from practising at the bar, on account of the oath of supremacy. _Id._ 320; and compare the letter of six catholic lords with the answer of lord deputy and council in the same volume.
[523] Davis's _Reports_, ubi supra; "Discovery of Causes," etc., 260; Carte's _Life of Ormond_, i. 14; Leland, 418. It had long been an object with the English government to extinguish the Irish tenures and laws. Some steps towards it were taken under Henry VIII.; but at that time there was too great a repugnance among the chieftains. In Elizabeth's instructions to the Earl of Sussex on taking the government in 1560, it is recommended that the Irish should surrender their estates, and receive grants in tail male, but no greater estate. _Desiderata Curiosa Hibernica_, i. 1. This would have left a reversion in the Crown, which could not have been cut off, I believe, by suffering a recovery. But as those who held by Irish tenure had probably no right to alienate their lands, they had little cause to complain. An act in 1569 (12 Eliz. c. 4), reciting the greater part of the Irish to have petitioned for leave to surrender their lands, authorises the deputy by advice of the privy council to grant letters patent to the Irish and degenerate English, yielding certain reservations to the queen. Sidney mentions, in several of his letters, that the Irish were ready to surrender their lands. Vol. i. 94, 105, 165.
The act 11 Jac. 1, c. 5, repeals divers statutes that treat the Irish as enemies, some of which have been mentioned above. It takes all the king's subjects under his protection to live by the same law. Some vestiges of the old distinctions remained in the statute-book, and were eradicated in Strafford's parliament. 10 & 11 Car. 1, c. 6.
[524] Leland, 254.
[525] See a note in Leland, ii. 302. The truth seems to be, that in this, as in other Irish forfeitures, a large part was restored to the tenants of the attainted parties.
[526] Leland, ii. 301.
[527] Carte's _Life of Ormond_, i. 15; Leland, 429; Farmer's "Chronicle of Sir Arthur Chichester's government," in _Desiderata Curiosa Hibernica_, i. 32; an important and interesting narrative; also vol. ii. of the same collection, 37; Bacon's Works, i. 657.
[528] Leland, 437, 466; Carte's _Ormond_, 22; _Desiderata Curiosa Hibernica_, 238, 243, 378 _et alibi_; ii. 37 _et post_. In another treatise published in this collection, entitled "A Discourse on the State of Ireland," 1614, an approaching rebellion is remarkably predicted. "The next rebellion, whensoever it shall happen, doth threaten more danger to the state than any that hath preceded; and my reasons are these: 1. They have the same bodies they ever had; and therein they have and had advantage over us. 2. From their infancies they have been and are exercised in the use of arms. 3. The realm, by reason of long peace, was never so full of youth as at this present. 4. That they are better soldiers than heretofore, their continual employments in the wars abroad assure us; and they do conceive that their men are better than ours. 5. That they are more politic, and able to manage rebellion with more judgment and dexterity than their elders, their experience and education are sufficient. 6. They will give the first blow; which is very advantageous to them that will give it. 7. The quarrel for the which they rebel will be under the veil of religion and liberty, than which nothing is esteemed so precious in the hearts of men. 8. And lastly, their union is such, as not only the old English dispersed abroad in all parts of the realm, but the inhabitants of the pale cities and towns, are as apt to take arms against us, which no precedent time hath ever seen, as the ancient Irish."--Vol. i. 432. "I think that little doubt is to be made, but that the modern English and Scotch would in an instant be massacred in their houses."--P. 438. This rebellion the author expected to be brought about by a league with Spain and with aid from France.
[529] The famous parliament of Kilkenny, in 1367, is said to have been very numerously attended. Leland, i. 319. We find indeed an act (10 H. 7, c. 23) annulling what was done in a preceding parliament, for this reason, among others, that the writs had not been sent to all the shires, but to four only. Yet it appears that the writs would not have been obeyed in that age.
[530] Speech of Sir John Davis (1612), on the parliamentary constitution of Ireland, in Appendix to Leland, vol. ii. p. 490, with the latter's observations on it. Carte's _Ormond_, i. 18; Lord Mountmorres's _Hist. of Irish Parliament_.
[531] In the letter of the lords of the pale to King James above mentioned, they express their apprehension that the erecting so many insignificant places to the rank of boroughs was with the view of bringing on fresh penal laws in religion; "and so the general scope and institution of parliament frustrated; they being ordained for the assurance of the subjects not to be pressed with any new edicts or laws, but such as should pass with their general consents and approbations."--P. 158. The king's mode of replying to this constitutional language was characteristic. "What is it to you whether I make many or few boroughs? My council may consider the fitness, if I require it. But what if I had created 40 noblemen and 400 boroughs? The more the merrier, the fewer the better cheer." _Desid. Cur. Hib._ 308.
[532] Mountmorres, i. 166. The whole number of peers in 1634 was 122, and those present in parliament that year were 66. They had the privilege not only of voting, but even protesting by proxy; and those who sent none, were sometimes fined. _Id._ vol. i. 316.
[533] Carte's _Ormond_, i. 48; Leland, ii. 475 _et post_.
[534] Leland, iii. 4 _et post_. A vehement protestation of the bishops about this time, with Usher at their head, against any connivance at popery, is a disgrace to their memory. It is to be met with in many books. Strafford, however, was far from any real liberality of sentiment. His abstinence from religious persecution was intended to be temporary, as the motives whereon it was founded. "It will be ever far forth of my heart to conceive that a conformity in religion is not above all other things principally to be intended. For undoubtedly till we be brought all under one form of divine service, the Crown is never safe on this side, etc. It were too much at once to distemper them by bringing plantations upon them, and disturbing them in the exercise of their religion, so long as it be without scandal; and so indeed very inconsiderate, as I conceive, to move in this latter, till that former be fully settled, and by that means the protestant party become by much the stronger, which in truth I do not yet conceive it to be." _Straff. Letters_, ii. 39. He says, however, and I believe truly, that no man had been touched for conscience' sake since he was deputy. _Id._ 112. Every parish, as we find by Bedell's _Life_, had its priest and mass-house; in some places mass was said in the churches; the Romish bishops exercised their jurisdiction, which was fully obeyed; but "the priests were grossly ignorant and openly scandalous, both for drunkenness and all sort of lewdness."--P. 41, 76. More than ten to one in his diocese, the county of Cavan, were recusants.
[535] Some at the council-board having intimated a doubt of their authority to bind the kingdom, "I was then put to my last refuge, which was plainly to declare that there was no necessity which induced me to take them to counsel in this business, for rather than fail in so necessary a duty to my master, I would undertake upon the peril of my head to make the king's army able to subsist, and to provide for itself amongst them, without their help." _Strafford Letters_, i. 98.
[536] _Id._ i. 183; Carte, 61.
[537] The protestants, he wrote word, had a majority of eight in the Commons. He told them, "it was very indifferent to him what resolution the house might take; that there were two ends he had in view, and one he would infallibly attain--either a submission of the people to his majesty's just demands, or a just occasion of breach, and either would content the king; the first was undeniably and evidently best for them."--_Id._ 277, 278. In his speech to the two houses, he said, "His majesty expects not to find you muttering, or to name it more truly, mutinying in corners. I am commanded to carry a very watchful eye over these private and secret conventicles, to punish the transgression with a heavy and severe hand; therefore it behoves you to look to it."--_Id._ 289. "Finally," he concludes, "I wish you had a right judgment in all things; yet let me not prove a Cassandra amongst you, to speak truth and not be believed. However, speak truth I will, were I to become your enemy for it. Remember therefore that I tell you, you may easily make or mar this parliament. If you proceed with respect, without laying clogs and conditions upon the king, as wise men and good subjects ought to do, you shall infallibly set up this parliament eminent to posterity, as the very basis and foundation of the greatest happiness and prosperity that ever befell this nation. But, if you meet a great king with narrow circumscribed hearts, if you will needs be wise and cautious above the moon [sic], remember again that I tell you, you shall never be able to cast your mists before the eyes of a discerning king; you shall be found out; your sons shall wish they had been the children of more believing parents; and in a time when you look not for it, when it will be too late for you to help, the sad repentance of an unadvised heart shall be yours, lasting honour shall be my master's."
These subsidies were reckoned at near £41,000 each, and were thus apportioned: Leinster paid £13,000 (of which £1000 from the city of Dublin), Munster £11,000, Ulster £10,000, Connaught £6,800. Mountmorres, ii. 16.
[538] Irish Statutes, 10 Car. 1, c. 1, 2, 3, etc.; _Strafford Letters_, i. 279, 312. The king expressly approved the denial of the graces, though promised formerly by himself. _Id._ 345; Leland, iii. 20.
"I can now say," Strafford observes (_Id._ 344), "the king is as absolute here as any prince in the whole world can be; and may still be, if it be not spoiled on that side."
[539] _Strafford Letters_, i. 353, 370, 402, 442, 451, 454, 473; ii. 113, 139, 366; Leland, iii. 30, 39; Carte, 82.
[540] It is, however, true that he discouraged the woollen manufacture, in order to keep the kingdom more dependent, and that this was part of his motive in promoting the other. Vol. ii. 19.
[541] Leland, iii. 51. Strafford himself (ii. 397) speaks highly of their disposition.
[542] Carte's _Ormond_, 100, 140; Leland, iii. 54 _et post_; Mountmorres, ii. 29. A remonstrance of the Commons to Lord-Deputy Wandesford against various grievances was presented 7th November 1640, before Lord Strafford had been impeached. _Id._ 39. As to confirming the graces, the delay, whether it proceeded from the king or his Irish representatives, seems to have caused some suspicion. Lord Clanricarde mentions the ill consequences that might result, in a letter to Lord Bristol. Carte's _Ormond_, iii. 40.
[543] Sir Henry Vane communicated to the lords justices, by the king's command, March 16, 1640-1, that advice had been received and confirmed by the ministers in Spain and elsewhere, which "deserved to be seriously considered, and an especial care and watchfulness to be had therein: that of late there have passed from Spain (and the like may well have been from other parts) an unspeakable number of Irish churchmen for England and Ireland, and some good old soldiers, under pretext of asking leave to raise men for the King of Spain; whereas, it is observed among the Irish friars there, a whisper was, as if they expected a rebellion in Ireland, and particularly in Connaught." Carte's _Ormond_, iii. 30. This letter, which Carte seems to have taken from a printed book, is authenticated in _Clarendon State Papers_, ii. 143. I have mentioned in another part of this work (Chap. VIII.) the provocations which might have induced the cabinet of Madrid to foment disturbances in Charles's dominions. The lords justices are taxed by Carte with supineness in paying no attention to this letter (vol. i. 166); but how he knew that they paid none seems hard to say.
Another imputation has been thrown on the Irish government and on the parliament, for objecting to permit levies to be made for the Spanish service out of the army raised by Strafford, and disbanded in the spring of 1641, which the king had himself proposed. Carte, i. 133; and Leland, 82, who follows the former implicitly, as he always does. The events indeed proved that it would have been far safer to let those soldiers, chiefly catholics, enlist under a foreign banner; but considering the long connection of Spain with that party, and the apprehension always entertained that the disaffected might acquire military experience in her service, the objection does not seem so very unreasonable.
[544] The fullest writer on the Irish rebellion is Carte, in his _Life of Ormond_, who had the use of a vast collection of documents belonging to that noble family; a selection from which forms this third volume. But he is extremely partial against all who leaned to the parliamentary or puritan side, and especially the lords justices, Parsons and Borlase; which renders him, to say the least, a very favourable witness for the catholics. Leland, with much candour towards the latter, but a good deal of the same prejudice against the presbyterians, is little more than the echo of Carte. A more vigorous, though less elegant historian, is Warner, whose impartiality is at least equal to Leland's, and who may perhaps, upon the whole, be reckoned the best modern authority. Sir John Temple's _History of Irish Rebellion_, and Lord Clanricarde's _Letters_, with a few more of less importance, are valuable contemporary testimonies.
The catholics themselves might better leave their cause to Carte and Leland than excite prejudices instead of allaying them by such a tissue of misrepresentation and disingenuousness as Curry's _Historical Account of the Civil Wars in Ireland_.
[545] Sir John Temple reckons the number of protestants murdered, or destroyed in some manner, from the breaking out of the rebellion in October 1641, to the cessation in September 1643, at three hundred thousand, an evident and enormous exaggeration; so that the first edition being incorrectly printed, and with numerals, we might almost suspect a cipher to have been added by mistake (p. 15, edit. Maseres). Clarendon says forty or fifty thousand were murdered in the first insurrection. Sir William Petty, in his _Political Anatomy of Ireland_, from calculations too vague to deserve confidence, puts the number massacred at thirty-seven thousand. Warner has scrutinised the examinations of witnesses, taken before a commission appointed in 1643, and now deposited in the library of Trinity College, Dublin; and, finding many of the depositions unsworn, and others founded on hearsay, has thrown more doubt than any earlier writer on the extent of the massacre. Upon the whole, he thinks twelve thousand lives of protestants the utmost that can be allowed for the direct or indirect effects of the rebellion, during the two first years, except losses in war (_History of Irish Rebellion_, p. 397), and of these only one-third by murder. It is to be remarked, however, that no distinct accounts could be preserved in formal depositions of so promiscuous a slaughter, and that the very exaggerations show its tremendous nature. The Ulster colony, a numerous and brave people, were evidently unable to make head for a considerable time against the rebels; which could hardly have been, if they had only lost a few thousands. It is idle to throw an air of ridicule (as is sometimes attempted) on the depositions, because they are mingled with some fabulous circumstances, such as the appearance of the ghosts of the murdered on the bridge at Cavan; which by the way, is only told, in the depositions subjoined to Temple, as the report of the place, and was no cold-blooded fabrication, but the work of a fancy bewildered by real horrors.
Carte, who dwells at length on every circumstance unfavourable to the opposite party, despatches the Ulster massacre in a single short paragraph, and coolly remarks, that there were not many murders, "_considering the nature of such an affair_," in the first week of the insurrection. _Life of Ormond_, i. 175-177. This is hardly reconcilable to fair dealing. Curry endeavours to discredit even Warner's very moderate estimate; and affects to call him in one place (p. 184) "a writer highly prejudiced against the insurgents," which is grossly false. He praises Carte and Nalson, the only protestants he does praise, and bestows on the latter the name of impartial. I wonder he does not say that no one protestant was murdered. Dr. Lingard has lately given a short account of the Ulster rebellion (_Hist. of England_, x. 154), omitting all mention of the massacre, and endeavouring in a note at the end of the volume, to disprove, by mere scraps of quotation, an event of such notoriety, that we must abandon all faith in public fame if it were really unfounded.
[546] Carte, i. 253, 266; iii. 51; Leland, 154. Sir Charles Coote and Sir William St. Leger are charged with great cruelties in Munster. The catholic confederates spoke with abhorrence of the Ulster massacre. Leland, 161; Warner, 203. They behaved, in many parts, with humanity; nor indeed do we find frequent instances of violence, except in those counties where the proprietors had been dispossessed.
[547] Carte and Leland endeavour to show that the Irish of the pale were driven into rebellion by the distrust of the lords justices, who refused to furnish them with arms, after the revolt in Ulster, and permitted the parliament to sit for one day only, in order to publish a declaration against the rebels. But the prejudice of these writers is very glaring. The insurrection broke out in Ulster, October 23, 1641; and in the beginning of December the lords of the pale were in arms. Surely this affords some presumptions that Warner has reason to think them privy to the rebellion, or, at least, not very averse to it. P. 146. And, with the suspicion that might naturally attach to all Irish catholics, could Borlase and Parsons be censurable for declining to intrust them with arms, or rather for doing so with some caution? Temple, 56. If they had acted otherwise, we should certainly have heard of their incredible imprudence. Again, the catholic party, in the House of Commons, were so cold in their loyalty, to say the least, that they objected to giving any appellation to the rebels worse than that of discontented gentlemen. Leland, 140. See too Clanricarde's _Letters_, p. 33, etc. In fact, several counties of Leinster and Connaught were in arms before the pale.
It has been thought by some that the lords justices had time enough to have quelled the rebellion in Ulster before it spread farther. Warner, 130. Of this, as I conceive, we should not pretend to judge confidently. Certain it is that the whole army in Ireland was very small, consisting of only nine hundred and forty-three horse, and two thousand two hundred and ninety-seven foot. Temple, 32; Carte, 194. I think Sir John Temple has been unjustly depreciated; he was master of the rolls in Ireland at the time, and a member of the council--no bad witness for what passed in Dublin; and he makes out a complete justification, as far as appears, for the conduct of the lords justices and council towards the lords of the pale and the catholic gentry. Nobody alleges that Parsons and Borlase were men of as much energy as Lord Strafford; but those who sit down in their closets, like Leland and Warner, more than a century afterwards, to lavish the most indignant contempt on their memory, should have reflected a little on the circumstances.
[548] "I perceived (says Preston, general of the Irish, writing to Lord Clanricarde) that the catholic religion, the rights and prerogatives of his majesty, my dread sovereign, the liberties of my country, and whether there should be an Irishman or no, were the prizes at stake." Carte iii. 120. Clanricarde himself expresses to the king, and to his brother, Lord Essex, in January 1642, his apprehension that the English parliament meant to make it a religious war. Clanricarde's _Letters_, 61 _et post_. The letters of this great man, perhaps the most unsullied character in the annals of Ireland, and certainly more so than even his illustrious contemporary, the Duke of Ormond, exhibit the struggles of a noble mind between love of his country and his religion on the one hand, loyalty and honour on the other. At a later period of that unhappy war, he thought himself able to conciliate both principles.
[549] Carte, ii. 221; Leland, 420.
[550] Carte, ii. 216; Leland, 414.
[551] Carte, 222 _et post_; Leland, 420 _et post_.
[552] Carte, 258-316; Leland, 431 _et post_.
[553] The statements of lands forfeited and restored, under the execution of the act of settlement, are not the same in all writers. Sir William Petty estimates the superficies of Ireland at 10,500,000 Irish acres (being to the English measure nearly as eight to thirteen), whereof 7,500,000 are of good land, the rest being moor, bog, and lake. In 1641, the estates of the protestant owners and of the church were about one-third of these cultivable lands, those of catholics two-thirds. The whole of the latter were seized or sequestered by Cromwell and the parliament. After summing up the allotments made by the commissioners under the act of settlement, he concludes that, in 1672, the English, protestants, and church have 5,140,000 acres, and the papists nearly half as much. _Political Anatomy of Ireland_, C. 1. In Lord Orrery's _Letters_, i. 187 _et post_, is a statement, which seems not altogether to tally with Sir William Petty's; nor is that of the latter clear and consistent in all its computations. Lawrence, author of "The Interest of Ireland Stated," a treatise published in 1682, says, "Of 10,868,949 acres, returned by the last survey of Ireland, the Irish papists are possessed but of 2,041,108 acres, which is but a small matter above the fifth part of the whole."--Part ii. p. 48. But, as it is evidently below one-fifth, there must be some mistake. I suspect that in one of these sums he reckoned the whole extent, and in the other only cultivable lands. Lord Clare, in his celebrated speech on the Union, greatly over-rates the confiscations.
Petty calculates that above 500,000 of the Irish "perished and were wasted by the sword, plague, famine, hardship, and banishment, between the 23rd day of October 1641, and the same day 1652;" and conceives the population of the island in 1641 to have been nearly 1,500,000, including protestants. But his conjectures are prodigiously vague.
[554] Petty is as ill satisfied with the restoration of lands to the Irish, as they could be with the confiscations. "Of all that claimed innocency, seven in eight obtained it. The restored persons have more than what was their own in 1641, by at least one-fifth. Of those adjudged innocents, not one in twenty were really so."
[555] Carte, ii. 414 _et post_; Leland, 458 _et post_.
[556] Leland, 493 _et post_; Mazure, _Hist. de la Révolut._ ii. 113.
[557] M. Mazure has brought this remarkable fact to light. Bonrepos, a French emissary in England, was authorised by his court to proceed in a negotiation with Tyrconnel for the separation of the two islands, in case that a protestant should succeed to the crown of England. He had accordingly a private interview with a confidential agent of the lord lieutenant at Chester, in the month of October 1687. Tyrconnel undertook that in less than a year everything should be prepared. _Id._ ii. 281, 288; iii. 430.
[558] Leland, 537. This seems to rest on the authority of Leslie, which is by no means good. Some letters of Barillon in 1687 show that James had intended the repeal of the act of settlement. Dalrymple, 257, 263.
[559] See the articles at length in Leland, 619. Those who argue from the treaty of Limerick against any political disabilities subsisting at present do injury to a good cause [1827].
[560] Irish Stat. 9 W. III. c. 2.
[561] _Parl. Hist._ v. 1202.
[562] 7 W. III. c. 4.
[563] 7 W. III. c. 4.
[564] 9 W. III. c. 3; 2 Anne, c. 6.
[565] _Id._
[566] _Id._
[567] 7 W. III. c. 5.
[568] 9 W. III. c. 1; 2 Anne, c. 3, s. 7; 8 Anne, c. 3.
[569] Carte's _Ormond_, i. 328; Warner, 212. These writers censure the measure as illegal and impolitic.
[570] Leland says none; but by Lord Orrery's letters, i. 35, it appears that one papist and one anabaptist were chosen for that parliament, both from Tuam.
[571] Mountmorres, i. 158.
[572] Mountmorres, 3 W. & M. c. 2.
[573] _Ibid._ i. 163; Plowden's _Hist. Review of Ireland_, i. 263. The terrible act of the second of Anne prescribes only the oaths of allegiance and abjuration for voters at elections. § 24.
[574] Such conversions were naturally distrusted. Boulter expresses alarm at the number of pseudo-protestants who practised the law; and a bill was actually passed to disable any one, who had not professed that religion for five years, from acting as a barrister or solicitor. _Letters_, i. 226. "The practice of the law, from the top to the bottom, is almost wholly in the hands of these converts."
[575] "Evidence of State of Ireland in Sessions of 1824 and 1825," p. 325 (as printed for Murray). In a letter of the year 1755, from a clergyman in Ireland to Archbishop Herring, in the British Museum (Sloane MSS. 4164, 11), this is also stated. The writer seems to object to a repeal of the penal laws, which the catholics were supposed to be attempting; and says they had the exercise of their religion as openly as the protestants, and monasteries in many places.
[576] Plowden's _Historical Review of State of Ireland_, vol. i. _passim_.
[577] Sir William Petty, in 1672, reckons the inhabitants of Ireland at 1,100,000; of whom 200,000 English, and 100,000 Scots; above half the former being of the established church. _Political Anatomy of Ireland_, chap. ii. It is sometimes said in modern times, though very erroneously, that the presbyterians form a majority of protestants in Ireland; but their proportion has probably diminished since the beginning of the eighteenth century.
[578] Plowden, 243.
[579] Irish Stat. 6 G. I. c. 5.
[580] Mountmorres, ii. 142. As one house could not regularly transmit heads of bills to the other, the advantage of a joint recommendation was obtained by means of conferences, which were consequently much more usual than in England. _Id._ 179.
[581] _Id._ 184.
[582] Carte's _Ormond_, iii. 55.
[583] Vol. ii.; Mountmorres, i. 360.
[584] Journals, 27th June 1698; _Parl. Hist._ v. 1181. They resolved at the same time that the conduct of the Irish parliament, in pretending to re-enact a law made in England expressly to bind Ireland, had given occasion to these dangerous positions. On the 30th of June they addressed the king in consequence, requesting him to prevent anything of the like kind in future. In this address, as first drawn, the legislative authority of the _kingdom of England_ is asserted. But this phrase was omitted afterwards, I presume, as rather novel; though by doing so they destroyed the basis of their proposition, which could stand much better on the new theory of the constitution than the ancient.
[585] 5 G. I. c. 5; Plowden, 244. The Irish House of Lords had, however, entertained writs of error as early as 1644, and appeals in equity from 1661. Mountmorres, i. 339. The English peers might have remembered that their own precedents were not much older.
[586] See Boulter's _Letters_, passim. His plan for governing Ireland was to send over as many English-born bishops as possible. "The bishops," he says, "are the persons on whom the government must depend for doing the public business here." I. 238. This of course disgusted the Irish church.
[587] Mountmorres, i. 424.
[588] Plowden, 306 _et post_; Hardy's _Life of Lord Charlemont_.
INDEX
Abbé Gaultier, iii. 195
Abbot, Archbishop, i. 370, 386; ii. 35, 49, 75
Act of Uniformity, i. 110, 162, 189; ii. 309
Adamson, Archbishop of St. Andrews, iii. 276
_Advertisements_, i. 171
Aix la Chapelle, ii. 343, 361; iii. 122, 159, 259, 264
Albert, Archduke, i. 266
Alençon, Duke of, i. 136
Almanza, Battle of, iii. 206
Alva, Duke of, i. 128, 134; ii. 44
America, i. 290, 291; iii. 188, 192, 233
Anderson's _Reports_, i. 219, 358
Anderton, iii. 143, 144
Andrews, ii. 157
Andrews, Bishop of Winchester, ii. 58
Anglesea, Earl of, ii. 382, 416
Anglican church, i. 97, 107, 134, 162, 166, 171, 185, 201, 212, 372, 381, 385; ii. 60, 61, 150, 157, 183, 185, 290, 291, 294, 306, 307, 311, 321, 353, 419, 420; iii. 47, 50, 67, 69, 70, 90, 153, 156, 183, 215, 216, 218, 219, 274, 280, 353
Anglo-Irish, iii. 306, 320, 321, 334, 350, 353
Anglo-Norman, iii. 266, 309
Anglo-Saxon, ii. 120; iii. 267
Anjou, Duke of, i. 136, 217; iii. 185
Anne, Princess, iii. 159, 160, 178
Anne, Queen, iii. 175, 177, 179, 183, 184, 185, 198, 207, 212, 216, 217, 218, 245, 255, 260, 261, 263, 296, 350, 352
Anne Boleyn, i. 34, 35, 36, 37, 61, 68, 97; ii. 59
Anne of Brittany, i. 18
Anne of Cleves, i. 33
Anne of Denmark, iii. 88, 89
Antwerp, i. 81
_Arbitrary taxation_, i. 354
Argyle, Earl of, iii. 284, 285
Arianism, i. 94
Arlington, ii. 339, 341, 347, 350, 360
Armada, i. 138; ii. 121
Arminian, i. 371
Armorica, iii. 299
Armstrong, Sir Thomas, ii. 418; iii. 142
Arnot, iii. 284, 292
Arragon, iii. 191
Articuli Cleri, i. 301, 311
Arundel, Earl of, i. 147, 351; ii. 13, 347, 350; iii. 32, 58
Arundels, The, i. 49, 128, 217, 347
Ascham, i. 202; ii. 229
Ashburnham, ii. 159, 169, 195
Ashby, iii. 37, 240, 241, 247, 249
Ashton, iii. 143
Atkinson, Mr., i. 112
Atlantic, iii. 121
Atterbury, Bishop, iii. 214, 215, 221, 222
Augsburgh, i. 87
Austria, i. 114, 115, 120, 330; iii. 121, 189, 190, 191, 221
Aylesbury, iii. 240, 241, 247, 249
Aylmer of London, i. 191
Babington, i. 145, 152
Bacon, Antony, i. 243, 314, 321, 323, 366, 378
Bacon, Francis, i. 15, 18, 54, 106, 123, 192, 202, 213, 236, 257, 258, 292, 295, 303, 311, 333; ii. 28, 378; iii. 331
Baillie's _Letters_, ii. 106, 139, 149, 156, 161, 179, 180, 187
Balmerino, iii. 283
Banbury, iii. 17
Bancroft, i. 311, 365, 366
Bangor, Bishop of, iii. 215
Bank of England, iii. 120
Banks, ii. 16, 19
Barberini, Cardinal, ii. 61, 64, 65
Barebone, ii. 222
Barillon, ii. 368; iii. 44, 47, 48, 57, 62, 70
Barnardiston, Sir Samuel, iii. 21
Barnes, Doctor, i. 33
_Basilicon Doron_, i. 330
Bates, i. 311, 312, 363
Battle, i. 69
Baxter, ii. 163, 201, 293, 316, 356; iii. 153
Beauchamp, Lord, i. 206, 271, 272
Bedford, Earl of, i. 101, 173; ii. 109, 133, 138, 144
Bellasis, Lord, iii. 58
Bellay, Bishop of Bayonne, i. 67
Bennet, Sir John, i. 332
Benstead, iii. 140
Bentinck, iii. 166
Berkely, Lord, iii. 348
Berkley, Sir John, ii. 193, 194
Berwick-upon-Tweed, ii. 79; iii. 12, 34
Beza, i. 172
Birch's _Memoirs_, i. 192, 211; ii. 176
Birmingham, iii. 33
Blackstone, i. 14
Blair, Sir Adam, ii. 407
Blake, ii. 241
Blenheim, iii. 184
Blount, John, iii. 245
Bolingbroke, ii. 349; iii. 193, 196, 203, 205, 260, 261
Bolton, Lord Chancellor, iii. 355
Boniface of Este, iii. 160
Bonner, i. 94, 113, 114
Bonrepos, iii. 62
Booth, Sir George, ii. 254
Borlase, Sir John, iii. 341
Bosworth, i. 13
Boucher, Joan, i. 94
Boucher, John, i. 84
Bourbon, House of, iii. 185, 189
Boyer's _Historical Register_, iii. 262
Boyne, iii. 349
Bradshaw, ii. 225
Brady, Dr. iii. 37, 38
Brandon, Eleanor, i. 118
Brandon, Mary, i. 124
Brandt's _History of Reformation in Low Countries_, i. 83
Breda, ii. 290, 291, 312, 317
Brehon, iii. 301, 313, 318
Bremen, iii. 212
Brihuega, iii. 189
Bristol, Earl of, i. 351, 352, 384; ii. 333; iii. 34
_British Empire under Charles I_., i. 54
British Museum, iii. 2
Broghill, ii. 245, 246, 258
Brook, Lord, ii. 52
Browne, i. 71
Bruce, Edward, iii. 313
Brunswick, House of, iii. 81, 82, 160, 161, 202, 203, 212, 222, 224
Brussels, i. 111, 228
Bucer, Martin, of Strasburgh, i. 88, 89, 100
Buckhurst, Lord, i. 303
Buckingham, Countess of, ii. 66
Buckingham, Duke of, i. 30, 31, 56, 324, 343, 344, 345, 348, 349, 379, 384; ii. 7, 35, 37, 255, 339, 343, 351, 360; iii. 184, 196
Bullinger, i. 100, 171, 372
Burgundy, Duke of, iii. 192
Burleigh, Lord, i. 130, 133, 134, 142, 144, 156, 190, 191, 210, 218, 220, 229, 230, 231
Burnet, Bishop, i. 27, 33, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 43, 44, 46, 48, 56, 59, 60, 61, 62, 64, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 75, 77, 80, 82, 83, 84, 88, 89, 91, 92, 93, 95, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 107, 108, 126, 156, 164, 165, 166, 173, 175, 181, 213; ii. 98, 149, 178, 315, 319, 326, 328, 332, 353, 362, 393, 398, 425; iii. 44, 58, 62, 67, 80, 84, 89, 98, 100, 101, 105, 107, 108, 117, 129, 145, 154, 155, 156, 158, 159, 171, 179, 185, 215
Burton, iii. 243
Butler, C., _Memoirs of English Catholics_, i. 97, 111, 116, 167, 378; iii. 159, 316
Cabala, i. 384
Cadiz, iii. 121
Calais, i. 91, 102; iii. 34
Calamy, ii. 317
Calvert, i. 338, 340
Calvin, i. 88, 89, 94, 100, 109, 162, 204, 367, 372, 373, 374, 386; ii. 49, 50, 57, 70, 319, 353, 392, 420; iii. 50, 274
Cambridge, i. 67, 174, 176
Cambridge, Duke of, iii. 201
Camden, i. 115, 121, 123, 129, 222, 223, 230, 232, 324
Cameron, iii. 291
Cameronian Rebellion, iii. 286, 287
Campbell, iii. 287
Campegio, Cardinal, i. 62
Campian, i. 140
Cann, Sir Robert, ii. 404
Canterbury, i. 92, 96, 181, 182, 186; ii. 35; iii. 3, 213
Canterbury, Archbishop of, i. 66, 98, 224; ii. 74, 214
Cargill, iii. 291
Carisbrook, ii. 196
Carleton, Sir Dudley, i. 373
Carlow, iii. 307
Carmarthen, iii. 108
Carte, i. 46, 227, 315, 317, 325, 327, 333, 378
Carter, i. 308, 314, 316, 325; iii. 342, 343, 345, 346, 347, 348
Carteret, Sir Edward, ii. 172
Carteret, Sir George, ii. 328
Cartwright, Thomas, i. 176, 177, 178, 179, 183, 195, 196, 203
Catalonia, iii. 189, 191
Catherine of Arragon, i. 61, 62, 63, 67
Catherine Howard, i. 36
Catholics, i. 90, 93
Cato, iii. 32
Cawdrey, i. 365
Cecil, Sir R., i. 106, 110, 122, 123, 127, 131, 134, 135, 149, 155, 165, 173, 191, 210, 212, 230, 231, 244, 246, 257, 258, 309, 310, 314
Cecill, Sir W., i. 220
Celtic, iii. 299
Celtic tribes, i. 7; iii. 322
Chambers, Richard, ii. 6, 15
Channel, i. 77
Channel Fleet, iii. 128
Charenton, ii. 58
Charles, Archduke, i. 119, 135; iii. 185, 189
Charles, Prince, i. 343
Charles Edward, iii. 225
Charles I., i. 326, 347, 349, 352, 359, 360, 361, 382, 384, 386, 387; ii. 1, 3, 7, 8, 11, 12, 18, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 30, 31, 33, 37, 38, 40, 52, 53, 65, 67, 73, 82, 84, 100, 103, 113, 117, 123, 124, 126, 131, 133, 135, 136, 138, 141, 145, 152, 159, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 176, 177, 185, 187, 193, 194, 195, 197, 199, 204, 206, 207, 209, 210, 211, 212, 216, 217, 228, 229, 230, 234, 239, 240, 252, 255, 256, 266, 267, 270, 271, 273, 274, 280, 281, 285, 286, 287, 290, 295, 303, 312, 313, 315, 322, 328, 330, 332, 335, 344, 351, 352, 367, 372, 389, 394, 395, 397, 400, 401, 403, 406, 423, 424, 425; iii. 17, 22, 26, 35, 75, 131, 140, 161, 166, 243, 249, 260, 281, 282, 285, 336, 337, 340, 354
Charles II., i. 272, 355; ii. 183, 232, 269, 270, 278, 297, 298, 305, 321, 322, 324, 342, 343, 345, 358, 361, 364, 370, 393, 413, 418, 420, 423; iii. 1, 2, 6, 11, 13, 14, 31, 42, 43, 50, 60, 78, 83, 93, 94, 99, 100, 103, 127, 132, 133, 137, 141, 142, 143, 151, 158, 182, 189, 213, 218, 226, 244, 284, 286, 287, 298, 335, 344, 347, 348, 349
Charles V., i. 63, 93, 264
Charles VIII., i. 18
Charles IX., i. 131; iii. 74
Chelsea, i. 72
Cheshire, iii. 182
Chester, iii. 32, 34, 306
Chichester, Sir Arthur, iii. 331, 332
Chillingworth, ii. 67, 68, 69, 151, 185
Chippenham, iii. 42
Christ Church, Oxford, i. 70, 171; iii. 69
Christian faith, i. 82
Cicero de Legibus, i. 202
Cisalpine school, i. 67
Civil rights, i. 8
Clanricarde, Earl of, iii. 323, 339
Clare, Earl of, ii. 144; iii. 338, 349
Clarence, Duke of, i. 29, 30, 32, 267
Clarendon, i. 352; ii. 11, 12, 13, 21, 54, 58, 60, 61, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 77, 78, 80, 81, 84, 88, 94, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 113, 114, 119, 124, 125, 129, 134, 136, 140, 141, 143, 145, 146, 152, 154, 155, 158, 162, 163, 167, 169, 171, 173, 186, 187, 188, 190, 196, 198, 199, 200, 211, 212, 224, 227, 229, 232, 241, 253, 254, 255, 263, 264, 265, 267, 270, 272, 279, 284, 285, 295, 296, 299, 303, 305, 306, 308, 310, 312, 315, 318, 325, 326, 328, 330, 331, 332, 333, 336, 337, 338, 340, 342, 344, 374, 377; iii. 3, 6, 9, 10, 58, 84, 163, 176, 213, 217, 344
Clement VII., Pope, i. 62, 67, 267
Cleves, i. 310
Clifford, ii. 341, 347, 361
Clovis, i. 259
Coke, Lord, i. 301, 310, 311, 312, 318, 321, 322, 324, 333, 335, 339, 342, 359; ii. 22, 28, 89, 298; iii. 41, 54, 87, 140, 311, 355
Coldstream, The, ii. 288
Coleman, ii. 384, 386, 389
Colepepper, ii. 110, 132, 168, 169, 170, 171; iii. 238
_Collectanea Juridica_, i. 52
Collier, i. 61, 70, 71, 82, 84, 85, 87, 90, 92, 99, 100, 113, 163, 212, 325, 372, 378, 386; ii. 50, 58, 104, 211, 292, 295
Colnbrook, ii. 140
Common Pleas, i. 10
Commons, The, i. 13, 21, 23, 27, 42, 46, 47, 49, 55, 64, 112, 119, 120, 124, 133, 138, 180, 181, 197, 198, 199, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 243, 245, 246, 247, 250, 251, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 280, 281, 282, 284, 285, 286, 287, 288, 289, 290, 291, 292, 293, 299, 301, 303, 306, 307, 309, 312, 313, 314, 315, 316, 317, 318, 330, 332, 333, 334, 335, 336, 337, 338, 341, 344, 345, 346, 348, 349, 350, 351, 353, 359, 360, 361, 363, 364, 365, 366, 370, 374, 385, 387; ii. 1, 2, 4, 9, 17, 22, 81, 82, 85, 86, 90, 93, 94, 97, 98, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 116, 123, 124, 127, 130, 132, 134, 135, 137, 138, 143, 146, 147, 151, 152, 156, 165, 180, 182, 183, 185, 187, 189, 192, 197, 202, 203, 205, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 220, 226, 238, 239, 248, 262, 268, 270, 273, 274, 279, 280, 283, 287, 295, 297, 302, 304, 310, 317, 320, 324, 325, 327, 334, 345, 346, 353, 359, 368, 370, 372, 375, 376, 379, 390, 396, 397, 398, 402, 403, 407, 409, 410, 425;